On Monday, November 2, the Larimer County Commissioners will vote on whether or not to amend the Larimer County Land Use Code to include “24 inch and larger water and sewer pipeline projects” as “matters of state interest” which would require a Larimer County 1041 permit. The meeting is in the first floor Hearing Room of the Courthouse offices building at 200 W. Oak, at 6:30 pm. The 1041 designation is the only item on the agenda. We are urging members of the public to appear before the county commissioners to voice their support of this measure. 

What does this mean?  Currently pipelines, such as the City of Greeley’s 60” water transmission pipeline, only have to clear a “location and extent” review process at the planning commission level.  This means that projects planned and implemented by an agency outside of Larimer County can destroy historic resources, destroy natural areas, and condemn private property through eminent domain without any public comment and without their projects being reviewed by elected officials in our county.  The current system gives the public no effective say in these projects.  The 1041 permitting process will provide a more rigorous review of pipeline projects.  This process has already been approved by the county for electrical power plants, nuclear power plants, wind generators, electrical transmission lines and substations, and natural gas pipelines and storage facilities.

Background:

The current “location and extent” review process for major pipeline projects is inadequate because:

• Projects are only reviewed at the planning commission level.  Elected officials are not given an opportunity to weigh in on these projects.  Even if a planning commission votes against a project, the project proponent can ignore the recommendation and proceed with the project anyway.
• Projects do not have to comply with the Larimer County Master Plan and the Larimer County Land Use Code.
• The process does not require citizen involvement.  Although citizens are allowed to comment at the Location and Extent hearing, affected property owners do not receive any formal notification of the meeting, and furthermore their comments are meaningless.
• There is no mechanism to ensure that the project is carried out in accordance with the proposal submitted to the county.

Under the 1041 permitting process: 

• Proposed projects must be consistent with the Larimer County Master Plan.

• Public hearings before both the planning commission and the county commissioners are required, and Larimer County must provide written notice of the date and time of the hearings to property owners in the vicinity of the proposed project.
• The applicant must present reasonable siting and design alternatives.
• The proposed project must not have a “significant adverse affect” on the land on which the proposal is situated, or on adjacent lands.
• The project must not adversely affect “any sites and structures listed on the State or National Registers of Historic Places.”
• The benefits of the proposed development must outweigh the losses of any natural resources or agricultural productivity caused by the proposed project.
• The proposed project may be subject to performance guarantees.

Talking Points

The following talking points are based on our personal experience dealing with the Greeley water transmission pipeline. 

• Greeley did not involve the neighborhood in the development of plans for the pipeline. If they had, we believe that a solution could have been reached that everyone could live with.  As it is, Greeley chose a specific route, and then announced it to the public.  Affected landowners (those whose property was going to be condemned) did not receive official notification of Greeley’s plan; instead they received an invitation from an engineering company to an “open house” about the pipeline.  The intention of the open house was to present information, not gather community input.  No community input on the siting of this pipeline was ever sought by Greeley, or required by Larimer County.

• The location and extent review process was flawed.  The only public hearing about this pipeline was before the Larimer County Planning Commission.  The pipeline agenda item was not heard until 11:00 pm and the hearing did not end until 1:00 am, in spite of the planning commission’s own rules that agenda items not heard before 10:00 pm should be rescheduled.  Although the project proponents were given ample time for their presentations, project opponents were asked to limit their time to 2-3 minutes each, in spite of the fact that most had been waiting since 6:30 pm for a chance to speak.

The proponents’ presentation contained inaccurate information; specifically, the proponent stated that no cultural or historic resources would be affected by the proposed pipeline.  This was proved false in testimony by landowner Mary Humstone, who had received notification from the Colorado Historical Society that the proposed route of the pipeline was eligible for the National Register of Historic Places.  The property was subsequently listed on the Register.

Citizen comments presented at the location and extent hearing were ignored by the planning commission at the recommendation of the staff, who interrupted the hearing several times to remind the commissioners that their vote was advisory only, and to advise them to work with Greeley rather than side with affected landowners and neighbors.

• The 1041 process will provide for meaningful public input into project siting and mitigation.  Currently public testimony means nothing. In spite of 2,000 signatures of LaPorte residents, and concerns expressed by the LaPorte Area Planning Advisory Board, Larimer County Commissioners, state elected officials, the Colorado Historical Society, Colorado Preservation Inc, the Audubon Society and numerous other state and local groups, Greeley has not had to alter its plans in any way, nor has it ever even considered an alternative route that would avoid damage to registered historic resources.

• Under the 1041 process, landowners whose land will be condemned by a proposed project will have an opportunity to appeal to elected officials, who will have to review a pipeline project.  Under current regulations, no elected official is given an opportunity to weigh in on a project.

• The 1041 process gives Larimer County a say in what outside entities do within our borders.  It does not preclude development; it permits development on our own terms.  We get the power to determine how a project should be developed, not outside interests like the city of Greeley.  This is appropriate.  Under the current process, Greeley will do what is easiest and cheapest for Greeley, without any concern about Larimer County or its citizens. The only regulatory authority in the Greeley pipeline project is the US Army Corps of Engineers, which allowed Greeley to segment the 30-mile pipeline into five discrete projects which masks the cumulative impact on our county lands and the Poudre River

• Careful analysis of alternatives should be part of any major project. But in the case of the Greeley pipeline, Greeley chose the easiest and cheapest route without serious consideration of any alternatives.  Although 18 routes were mapped, no alternatives seriously examined environmental issues, damage to the Poudre River, damage to historic resources, or the willingness of property owners to grant easements. 

• Under current regulations, the burden is on individual property owners to try to fight a wealthy municipality with unlimited resources. Requiring a 1041 permit would at least give the county some power to protect those special places that our county land use master plan calls on us to protect.

For more information:

Minutes of September 19, 2009 Larimer County Planning Commission meeting at which the commission Planning Commission recommended that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the 1041 permitting process for pipelines: http://www.larimer.org/boards/minutes/091609lcpc.htm

Section 14 of the Larimer County Land Use Code: http://www.larimer.org/planning/planning/land_use_code/land_use_code.pdf#page=455

The proposed Code amendment is as follows:
ADD to Sec. 14.4.
J.  Siting and development of new or extended domestic water or sewer transmission lines which use 24 inch or larger diameter pipelines or two or more pipelines of any size which are parallel to and located within 100 feet of one another and have a total diameter equal to or greater than 24 inches.  Domestic water transmission lines include those used to transport both raw and treated water.  This designation shall not include the maintenance, repair, adjustment or removal of an existing pipeline or the relocation of an existing pipeline within the same easement or right-of-way.  The designation shall also not include the addition, replacement, expansion or maintenance of appurtenant facilities on existing pipelines.